UPDATE: Billy Crystal-Hosted Oscars Watched By 39.3 Million, Up From Last Year

UPDATE 11:30 AM: The 84th Annual Academy Awards drew 39.3 million viewers in Live+Same Day. That is up 4% from last year’s viewership and the second-most-watched Oscar ceremony in the past five years, behind the 2010 show where The Hurt Locker defeated blockbuster Avatar. Among adults 18-49, last night’s Oscar telecast (11.7 rating) was even with last year, an impressive feat given that that this year’s host Billy Crystal is almost 64, while last year’s show was hosted by twenty- and thirtysomethings James Franco and Anne Hathaway. Here is historical data for the Academy Awards’ audiences over the past decade, along with the Best Picture winner that year.

2012 39.3 million The Artist
2011 37.9 million The King’s Speech
2010 41.3 million The Hurt Locker
2009 36.3 million Slumdog Millionaire
2008 32.0 million No Country For Old Men
2007 40. 2 million The Departed
2006 38.9 million Crash
2005 42.1 million Million Dollar Baby
2004 43.5 million Lord Of The Rings: Return Of The King
2003 33.0 million Chicago
2002 41.8 million A Beautiful Mind
2001 42.9 million Gladiator

PREVIOUS 7:50 AM: Despite mostly negative reviews and no popular blockbusters among the movies vying for the top prizes, last night’s 84th Annual Academy Awards drew a 25.5 household rating/38 share from 8:30-11:24 PM, up 4% from last year (24.5/37). This year’s show was also up from 2009 and 2008 while down from 2010 and 2007 (see historical data below). Among adults 18-49, the Oscars delivered a 14.3 rating in Nielsen’s Local People Meter markets, on par with last year’s 14.4 despite having a host host, Billy Crystal, whose age was the ages of last year’s co-hosts James Franco and Anne Hathaway combined.

People may have tuned in because they knew more of the nominees this year than last, though none of them won anything and it was pretty much a foregone conclusion that they would not (except for Streep’s upset).

Jiminy Kritic • on Feb 27, 2012 9:16 am

It was still a train wreck.

Jessy S. • on Feb 27, 2012 9:27 am

That’s strange, the Oscars weren’t on in our house. In fact, I didn’t even manage to check out Nikki’s snarking until after the program ended.

From all account, I thought YOU LOT made it 100% clear that last year performance was the worst in the universe and hated on James Franco in particular for the whole year.

Now that Billy Crystal, has also performed badly. What now? He’s the worst in the universe oh WAIT (I’m sure we can find some excuses for him) or are people gonna be selective on who the HATE – let me just answer myself YES.

Again, kind of funny the wording on the article, last year they were so hard on the hosting, I actually thought the world HAD indeed ended.

However, the angle you are going for (I’ve noticed on other websites too – the shame plus the fact James Franco MUST be laughing at them)with the slight 4% increase reflect this clearly isn’t an easy gig for anyone (especially with more experience than 1st time hosts).

Meaning last year, they also bettered 2009 and 2008 show, heck again no one told me that, they were so busy hating on James Franco.

Just like to point out I LOVE LOVE Billy, I just truly hate double standards. Last year wasn’t perfect and this year wasn’t perfect BUT ALL TRIED THEIR BEST WITH WHAT THEY HAD, I would say James Franco is (has always been) WINNING.

Lillian Push • on Feb 27, 2012 11:48 am

You seem to have a lot vested in this discussion.

Franco incurred wrath not simply because he failed to entertain, but because he came across as disrespectful and unprofessional. He was clearly unprepared and impaired.

Crystal was, if anything, prepared and unimpaired. So I think most people were appreciative of him trying, just not very entertained by the results. Billy Crystal is a very needy performer. It’s tiring to watch him, always trying to very hard for the applause. Notice how he made the opening, not about the films nominated, but about him. The “I WILL NOT HOST!” thing only underscores his narcissism and inflated view of his ability to amuse.

People can feel disappointed with both hosting attempts for different reasons – and without it lifting or lowering the other effort. To me, Franco was bad in an order of magnitude way beyond Crystal’s ability, simply because I give people credit for trying.

Alex • on Feb 27, 2012 1:24 pm

I agree with Lilian. One was bad, the other one cringey.

jake • on Feb 27, 2012 2:26 pm

I think that’s unfair to say that james franco did not want to be there. It’s a tough job and he had a lot of things on his plate and no time to rehearse.

What I think is just common is that everyone likes to put the show down for whatever reason, no matter what they do and I don’t understand why out of all the awards shows that the oscars get the most wrath — even Kathie lee was on a rampage this morning about it.

It’s a celebration of movies and its one night. you’d think if people really thought this show sucked as much as all your critics say that people would stop having parties and this show would not be seen by at least 36 million people every year.

mjrules • on Feb 27, 2012 2:54 pm

“You seem to have a lot vested in this discussion”,yes, only because I was utterly disappointed that the media/some people treated Franco as if he murdered someone and for the whole year went on and on about it.

The hate was on another level, and people truly took pleasure in trying to destroy his career just because of a show? That you should forget after a week.

It was a freaking award show that sometimes it’s a hit or a miss, and I have to disagree that I didn’t think he was being disrespectful and unprofessional not wearing Gucci.

“He was clearly unprepared and impaired”, not from the behind the scenes footage or when he came out.

In fact, I found out more about the Oscars because of his live tweets (which he was smart enough to do and he didn’t have too) from behind the scenes than any other time, I’ve watched the show, it actually got me interested in the show more than I would have.

Also, what I liked about him was he was being himself. Not pretending for Hollywood sake. If, they didn’t want, what they got someone should have checked his character profile (or at least put him with someone he knew – remember there were two people there) plus also ensure the material meets the age group not the 1920s and importantly let the material be at least FUNNY.

The only thing he did wrong was wear that stupid dress. The shock value was gone, especially if you have seen pictures of him in a dress before (stop doing that Franco). However, him wearing leotard was priceless (the guy looked good from the back).

He also got his grandmother involved and his whole family was there, which was a good thing considering his father died recently, apparently his dad was very proud of his son hosting on the night plus importantly everyone seems to forget he was up for an award for 127 Hours, which he already knew Colin would pick up (that must have hurt a little – pointless even waiting to here your name call out, if you know who will win anyway, well in advance).

I personally, think they offered him the gig to host because they felt slightly guilty that he should have won (sorry, Colin should have won for the year before, James only had a rock and was in the movie 90% by himself).

I thought the samething in 2008, when Franco and Rogen hosted the best picture nominees (Franco had done Pineapple Express and Milk and deserved at least a Best Supporting Actor Nod).

Regarding Billy, majority of Hollywood stars come cross as very needy to a certain point and he’s no different. The pressure must have been on him too and like last year at least he tried (they all did in their various ways).

Sorry, it’s another long one. I think I’m really upset also that Gary Oldman didn’t win. How many years have I watched the Oscars on and off and still no one that I wanted to truly win has ever won (IT FREAKING HURTS). The man waited 25 years for a nomination and still nothing.

What on earth does he have to do to win something, because I tell you WHAT cutting off your arm doesn’t help, playing an ape doesn’t help, being Leo Dicapro does help, or should he just wait until he’s 82 years old and hope for the best aaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh.

I’m gonna have to stop myself because don’t even get me started on Viola Davis loss too.

erwin • on Feb 27, 2012 4:00 pm

if that was james franco being himself, then wow what a diffident, uninteresting, sloucher he must be.

bibi • on Feb 27, 2012 4:16 pm

My goodness. You must be on Franco’s team; either that or you are an obsessed fan. I thought I was reading Franco’s wikipedia.

“How many years have I watched the Oscars on and off and still no one that I wanted to truly win has ever won (IT FREAKING HURTS).” – If you are in pain because the actor you want to win doesn’t, you should stop watching this awards show.

You seem to have some knowledge about the industry and the Oscars but are blind to the fact that it’s a 100% bs popularity contest, and most of the “best” and deserving don’t win nor get nominated.

Marisa Tomei and Adrien Brody have won Oscars, and of course one of the best lines from Jon Stewart, “…Martin Scorsese, ZERO; Three Six Mafia, one.”

Max Renn • on Feb 27, 2012 5:28 pm

Didn’t read LOL

ja • on Feb 27, 2012 5:39 pm

Gary Oldman’s role in TTSS isn’t one he should have won for. He should have one about 2 to 4 times. The important thing is that those in the industry know that he is talented, as opposed to others.

James Franco is (in my opinion) one of the least self-aware entertainers in America. His heart is in the right place, but he has no idea how much he turns off his own base. Ask people in New York, people in finance and law and art collectives and museums and labs, ask them about Franco, and they’ll roll their eyes.

The constant self-promotion is unbearable. When the economy was at its worst, with the VIX running all over the place late-2008, 2009, Franco was everywhere, doing sub-par work across so many fields. When fathers are out of work and their children are 23, 24 and unemployed, people do not want to hear James Franco talking about James Franco 24/7.

ne of the problems is that his hosting got caught up in the “America hates James Franco” meme. The guy is more annoying than Kim Kardashian. Danny Boyle, in a softball interview, throws the guy under the bus by telling the interviewer that he refers to himself in the third person.

Lillian Push • on Feb 27, 2012 6:48 pm

My, you DO go on . . .

Tjmax • on Feb 27, 2012 9:37 am

What’s fascinating to me is the fact that the host’s age for the Oscars show may have been a driving factor to the slight spike in audience figurers. That’s IF you believe in the Neilson, which is so flawed it’s almost criminal. But also what’s alarming is the demo that Film makers are looking for is not people like Billy Crystal who looks like he’s been to see Dr. Botox one to many times.

The Oscars like the Film Industry is looking at a bleak future if it does not sort out it’s act soon. But then those of the academy are as antiquated as the audience that watches the Oscars. Kids these days couldn’t give a crap about the Oscars. Unless of course Justin Bieber is going to walk down the Red Carpet. And if that was the reason for the demo spike, well were are all F.cked…

AMPAS member • on Feb 27, 2012 9:42 am

I’m glad the show emphasized “the movies” and cut out all the lame dancing and singing that usually comes with the broadcast. The show even managed to be shorter with 9 nominees – which I hope goes the way of the buggy – and montages were effective. Maybe a bit too much of Billy C. but otherwise, I thought it moved well.

lukeandlaura • on Feb 27, 2012 9:45 am

“Billy Crystal, whose age was the ages of last year’s co-hosts James Franco and Anne Hathaway combined.”

The ageism is a nice touch.

sd • on Feb 27, 2012 9:47 am

As boring as Crystal was, at least he wasn’t an utter disaster like Franco and Hathaway.

mjrules • on Feb 27, 2012 10:41 am

“As boring as Crystal was”, did the show work YES OR NO. Your comments suggest NO. Some might agree, some not. Oh, sorry, disaster is disaster too doesn’t matter how you dress it.

From the twitter feeds a great majority actually wanted Franco and Hathaway back (YES, some people like them last year = SHOCK).

Again, all three tried their best with whatever they had to work with as they have very different styles.

Just sayin, don’t over play one group and make excuses for another. Everyone, presumed Crystal was going to SAVE THE WORLD from the evil forces of Franco and Hathaway but it didn’t quite work out like that did it.

Truth-o-Meter • on Feb 27, 2012 9:54 am

Negative reviews? Billy was GREAT. Everyone at our party was under 40 and all were laughing their butts off.

He’s the master, period. His deadpan takes after coming out of a clip, followed by a great line, are the best.

conor d. • on Feb 27, 2012 11:09 am

He tanked. It happens.

Alex • on Feb 27, 2012 1:29 pm

Sounds like you need a new party crowd.

Uhm, hello? • on Feb 27, 2012 10:06 am

Billy rocked it. He should do it every other year with Steve and Alec filling in between.

L.A. Angel • on Feb 27, 2012 10:09 am

This shouldn’t be shocking… No matter how bad the show is or how unseen the movies were people are going to tune in to see what people are wearing, who’s there, & to tweet about how bad something is….

Andy • on Feb 27, 2012 10:10 am

Had a mixed party of under and over 40 and everyone thought Billy was great.

What was bizarre to me was Angelina Jolie’s “pose” on stage. She looked like she could have been in a scene from a WWII movie where the hot looking woman in the concentration camp, gets dolled up and tries to seduce the commandant. After all she’s skinny enough and has tattoos.

jennifer • on Feb 27, 2012 10:57 am

So,let me get this straight: Abc removes the fairy tale themed “Once upon a time”-only to replace it with an awards show from la-la land-the land of fairy tales-Absolutely Priceless,you gotta love it! I’m sure there’s some irony in there somewhere-if anyone cares to look for it… Thank you.

Mike NS • on Feb 27, 2012 11:05 am

The awesome part of all the Brad Pitt interviews is how he embraces the role, not of alpha-male, not of beta-male, but he entirely embraces his role of gamma-male. The incessant awkward smile while trying to talk is priceless. The incessant awkward teeth smile to show Hollywood he thinks he has the prettiest face in the business – rolling on the floor laugh out loud funny.

Chris • on Feb 27, 2012 12:08 pm

Add to your not mentioned in the memoriam: Harry Morgan.

Sure, he was known for most of his life as a TV actor.. still, that doesn’t undo the numerous great films and contribution to the community.

Patrick Fegan • on Feb 27, 2012 12:25 pm

Oprah Winfrey –who appeared in less than a half dozen movies — gets the Jean Hersholt award and they do not even mention James Arness’ passing (he appeared in over 30).

Hmmmm.

Alex • on Feb 27, 2012 12:32 pm

Sorry, I thought the show was pretty good. The numbers were impressive considering there was little drama over who would win and relatively few have seen The Artist. Billy wasn’t spectacular, but he did a nice job under tough circumstances and let’s be honest– a lot of people who post here were committed to hating the show before it ever aired. Angelina’s pose was odd, but I guess she wanted to remind everybody how damn sexy she is because between the Tourist and the movie she directed that didn’t open her career is slumping. SBC made an ass of himself, but then his trademark is hostile, hateful humor. People shock when they don’t trust they have the talent to entertain. And in his case he’s right. The ageism is regrettable. Woody Allen is 76 and he wrote the best original screenplay of the year. So why bash on age?

Reader • on Feb 27, 2012 12:52 pm

I thought Crystal made Franco and Hathaway look great in comparison…as someone in my late 20s I didn’t laugh at a single Crystal joke.

Max Renn • on Feb 27, 2012 5:25 pm

Billy was telling jokes, while Franco and Hathaway were jokes.

grammypix • on Feb 27, 2012 12:53 pm

So The Grammys got more viewers than The Oscars (40m vs. 39.3m) . That’s a first.

Paco • on Feb 27, 2012 4:20 pm

Because Whitney Houston died the night before. That’s the only reason.

michael • on Feb 27, 2012 12:53 pm

this show was soooo boring. please Academy, never have billy crystal host again. and please stop with the musical numbers. no one under the age of 60 wants to see that. please i beg of you.

Victoria Balfour • on Feb 27, 2012 12:57 pm

Christopher Plummer is 82 and he won Best Supporting Actor this year. So why bash on age?

steve • on Feb 27, 2012 1:11 pm

So, why do they have movie producers trying to do a live TV show? If people want a fast-paced show that is well run, why not use folks from talk shows like Oprah’s producers…?

And maybe next year… someone could think out-of-the-box and send a note to the nominees that they should prepare some talking points for a 30 second speech that are clever and not just a bunch of names…